ternational disputes, and its gradual recognition
as the most humane, economical, and enduring
method for their determination. The questions
submitted involve not only the adjustment of
claims relating to the rights of nations as be-
tween themselves, but also those of individuals
against foreign governments. During the Nine-
teenth Century, including cases now pending,
there have been over one hundred and thirty
important arbitrations, not to mention almost
as many more minor commissions for the settle-
ment of purely financial claims. Both in the
numbers and the questions involved the United
States and Great Britain have luiquestionably
led the way. The most important of these, and
one forming a landmark in the history of arbi-
tration, is the Joint High Commission, which
met at C4eneva in 1871 and determined the ques-
tions relating to the Alabama Claims (q.v.).
This was only one of the four articles of the
Treaty of V^'ashington (q.v.), submitting to arbi-
tration matters then in dis]jute between the
two countries. Besides actual causes submitted to such tribunals for settlement, various international conferences have been held and conventions adopted, some of the most significant of which are:
The proposal for the establishment of a per- manent court of arbitration, made by the Com- mittee of the International Law Association, which met at Brussels in 189.5; the Inter- parliamentary Conference on Arbitration and Peace, at Brussels in 1897; the proposal for the arbitration for the settlement of disputes be- tween the States of North, Central, and South America, signed at Washington, 1890; the Anglo- American Arbitration Treat.y, signed at Wash- ington, January 11, 1897, but never ratified by the Senate of the United States: the Italy-Argen- tine Republic GJeneral Treaty of Arbitration, signed at Eome, July 23, 1898; The Hague Con- vention, adopted at a plenary meeting of the Peace Conference at The Hague, July 29, 1899. The arbitration treaty between Great Britain and the United States mentioned above, pro- vided for the submission of all questions fall- ing of diplomatic adjustment to arbitrators. The questions were divided into three classes: (1) Pecuniary claims not aggregating £100,000, not involving territorial questions; (2) pecuni- ary claims of over £100.000, not involving ter- ritorial questions; (3) questions involving rights of a territorial nature. The tribunal for the settlement of the first class of questions was to be composed of three members; for the second, of five; for the third, of six. The odd member in each of the first two classes was to be selected by the United States Supreme Court and the British .Judicial Comoiittce of the Privy Coun- cil, acting jointly, or, on their failure to agree, by the King of Sweden and Norwaj'. The de- cisions of these courts were to be final. For the last class, the court was to be composed of three members of the United States Supreme Court and three members of the British Supreme Court of Judicature. Only awards in which five of the six concurred were to be final. For the provisions of the Hague Arbitration and Mediation Convention, see Hague Peace Conference.
The following is a list of some of the principal arbitrations and adjustments to which the United States has been a party:
(1) Between the United States and Great Britain, under the Jay Treaty of 1794, providing for three mixed commissions: one to settle the identity of the Saint Croix River, forming a part of the northeastern boundary; one to determine the compensation due to British subjects in consequence of impediments imposed by some of the States to the collection of debts by British creditors, in violation of the treaty of peace; and a third for the settlement of the question of contraband, the rights of neutrals, and the finality of decisions of prize courts.
( 2 ) Between the United States and Great Britain under the Treaty of Ghent, 1814, providing for three commissions: one to settle the ownership of certain islands in Passamaquoddy Bay and the Bay of Fundy; a seconj to determine the north- east boundary of the United States from the river Saint Croix to the river Saint Lawrence; and a third to determine the northern boundary of the United States along the middle of the Great Lakes to the water communication between Lakes Huron and Superior, and the further de- termination to the Lake of the Woods. On the latter point the commission could not agree.
(3) Between the United States and Great Britain, in 1818, regarding the obligation of Great Britain to restore slaves in the British pos- sessions at the time of signing the Treaty of Ghent. Referred to the Emperor of Russia, who decided that the L'nitcd States was entitled to compensation for slaves transported from terri- tories restored under the treaty. Two mixed boards were created to determine the claims; but these boards disagreeing, the sum of $1,204,- 9(i0 was finally accepted by the United States in full satisfaction.
( 4 ) Between the United States and Spain, in 1819, regarding the s.atisfaction of American claims against Spain during her occupation of Florida. By the terms of the Treaty of Florida, the United States agreed to settle these claims.
(5) Between the United States and Great Britain, in 1827, for the settlement of the dispute regarding the northeastern boundary. The King of the Netherlands was chosen arbitrator, but his award was not accepted by thc' L^nited States. I'he matter was afterwards settled by compro- mise, in the Webster-Ashburton Treaty.
(6) Between the United States and France, the claims of Aiuerican citizens growing out of French depredations at sea during the Napoleon- ic wars, and the French Beaumarchais Claim, and claim to special commercial privileges under the Louisiana Cession Treaty, were adjusted by Minister Rives after long negotiation in 1831 by an indemnity to the United States of .'}!5..558,- 108.07. But the French Government delayed in executing the convention and a diplomatic rup- ture resulted, only allayed by the mediation of Great Britain, in 1836, when the full amount was paid.
(7) Between the United States and Great Britain, in 1840, for the settlement of the San Juan water boundary. It had been decided to continue the line between the British Possessions and the United States southerly from the mid- dle of the channel separating Vancouver's Island from the continent, through the said channel and Fuca Straits to the Pacific Ocean. The dispute as to the latter portion of the boundary was referred to a commission which disagreed. By the Treaty of Washington (1871) the quea-
